[Poll] War Declarations

[Amadman]

I will most likely never be involved in such things.

But I like the sound of what Backyard Employee and Najwalaylay are saying.

Where certain actions could be taken as a declaration of war. Basically opening up a guild to a forced wardec.


Large "bully" like guilds would not be able to directly force a wardec. But there actions could lead to other willing guilds to war deck them instead. The results are the same, with really only consenting guilds being involved in this case.


Also groups that try to grief in town could find their actions opening themselves up to war as well.

One negative of that though would be that nonguilded players would become the safer target .

Which often could equate to newer players being the targets.

 

[ThaBadMan]

War declarations should always be forced, for one its in the name. You declare war.

There should be consequenses that is legal for pissing others off. MO was a example of how to turn all players red, not the way to go.

This way you can war dec all enemy guilds and receive no bad rep in wars.

 

[Bernfred]

we need to talk about the fundamental aim:

to join a guild is a potential risk if you lose blue town protection when you force it in any way, no matter the costs.

this speaks against the idea of making MO2 for everyone (steam release, blue towns safe zones) and guilds as core mechanic for Social- PvE- and PvP play.
i think people who want more PvP and vote yes will shoot themself in the foot (player count will decrease and only the hardcore vets will stay).

it speaks against the idea to make MO2 more into a true sandbox MMORPG for everyone:
"Henrik
— 10/13/2021
but we want to shrinken the gap for a themepark player to understand and get into mo"

PvP players wont leave just because of non-forced wardecs. also you dont need forced wardecs to have one, just join a guild whos into wardecs.
things will get much better with TC and more content to leave blue towns. the red flag is also very soft now, feel free to go red and farm tasks.
in fact i think more PvP players will stay when PvP does not turn into a deathmatch and "grief" fest. you know.. sugar tastes good but harms your health over the long run...

 

[Tzone]

we need to talk about the fundamental aim:

to join a guild is a potential risk if you lose blue town protection when you force it in any way, no matter the costs.

this speaks against the idea of making MO2 for everyone (steam release, blue towns safe zones) and guilds as core mechanic for Social- PvE- and PvP play.
i think people who want more PvP and vote yes will shoot themself in the foot (player count will decrease and only the hardcore vets will stay).

it speaks against the idea to make MO2 more into a true sandbox MMORPG for everyone:
"Henrik
— 10/13/2021
but we want to shrinken the gap for a themepark player to understand and get into mo"

PvP players wont leave just because of non-forced wardecs. also you dont need forced wardecs to have one, just join a guild whos into wardecs.
things will get much better with TC and more content to leave blue towns. the red flag is also very soft now, feel free to go red and farm tasks.
in fact i think more PvP players will stay when PvP does not turn into a deathmatch and "grief" fest. you know.. sugar tastes good but harms your health over the long run...

Bro games pretty dead, PvP players havent been logging in as much as they used to. There is very little PvP content, we have to ghost from GK to tind to meduli to bakti to look for people, but everyone is in towns and Guard Zoning. Lots of players were really hyped for wardecs but now since they are not forced people are pretty disappointed. Its was like the only thing PvPers were looking forward too. The other thing is just housing since it brings people back to the game for a little bit before it dies again.

If the game doesnt have forced wardec then you will lose players. People are tired of GZ PvP which is what you have without wardecs.

 

[Bernfred]

Bro games pretty dead, PvP players havent been logging in as much as they used to. There is very little PvP content, we have to ghost from GK to tind to meduli to bakti to look for people, but everyone is in towns and Guard Zoning. Lots of players were really hyped for wardecs but now since they are not forced people are pretty disappointed. Its was like the only thing PvPers were looking forward too. The other thing is just housing since it brings people back to the game for a little bit before it dies again.

If the game doesnt have forced wardec then you will lose players. People are tired of GZ PvP which is what you have without wardecs.

the idea alone to balance a game around an evolving Beta is INSANE!

pls,
include every upcoming system in your mind and think about persistence. i assume you have not played MO1 so its harder for you to imagine what the game will looke like after release.
the Beta is NOT to entertain people, its to make it rdy for the steam release and persistence.

 

[Bernfred]

btw. why are not 80% of the playerbase in a War right now (even in the Beta), if War is cool just accept.

ahh because they want to choose their enemys, imagine they get wardeced by Legion and Koto and cant enter the game anymore..oh wait...
people see wardecs as a tool for more PvP because PvP is lacking in the Beta which leads to this poll. kinda sad to see.



side note: majorities are not always right. not talking about the fact that the poll is open, which includes basic psychology/social problems.
a youtube comment: "If I asked people what they wanted most, they would have told me <faster horses>" ~ Henry Ford

 

[boogis]

i personally think there should free mechanics of war. so just let everyone has war with everyone. freely and forever.
we dont even need guild level in the sense of what been described. we need alliences. but gild lvl 5 cannont have any alliences, gild lvl 4 can have 2 alliences, guild 3 can have 5 allience guild lvl 2 can have 10 alliences and guild lvl 1 can have 15 alliences.
this way top guild never will be dominated over small guild cos small gild allience will destroy it. but why to have one guild lvl 5 if you can have small guild and join an allience??? you may ask. reason is that biggest guild have all power and resourses to itself but alliencee have to share it
PROBLEM SOLVED

 

[Woody]

Keeping in mind war decs (and to an extent town blacklist) are effectively just a way to circumvent the game's protections for the player and their guild, there still needs to consideration for guilds who are not PvP capable or who have no reason to be war declared in the first place. We know SV wants all types of players and guilds in the game.

As such, I don't ever see non-consensual war decs being a thing without strict underlying conditions that determine what would constitute one (e.g. guild frequently murdering another guild's members, attacking another guilds assets etc.) but still, I'm keen to see what SV has in store for the rest of the system.

 

[Ragemeister]

You should only be able to force war on someone if they own a keep or if you own a keep and someone is built on your area of controlled land, but my guess is that is already planned to come with TC.

We should never allow war dec on any random guild, a guild is nothing more than a title under your name unless you are holding a keep. If you can just randomly war whoever you want then people would just avoid joining them altogether, not something we need.

 

[Bernfred]

Keeping in mind war decs (and to an extent town blacklist) are effectively just a way to circumvent the game's protections for the player and their guild, there still needs to consideration for guilds who are not PvP capable or who have no reason to be war declared in the first place. We know SV wants all types of players and guilds in the game.

As such, I don't ever see non-consensual war decs being a thing without strict underlying conditions that determine what would constitute one (e.g. guild frequently murdering another guild's members, attacking another guilds assets etc.) but still, I'm keen to see what SV has in store for the rest of the system.

correct, i think you wont find these conditions.
a consent is already a deciding system which includes all variables the members care for.
i guess a "Tier 1 Wardec" where you get gray flagged (no MCs, rep loss) would find more participants who agree on a war.

You should only be able to force war on someone if they own a keep or if you own a keep and someone is built on your area of controlled land, but my guess is that is already planned to come with TC.

We should never allow war dec on any random guild, a guild is nothing more than a title under your name unless you are holding a keep. If you can just randomly war whoever you want then people would just avoid joining them altogether, not something we need.

the mentioned Tier 1 type of war could be coupled with forced wars for keep owners but even this can destroy the motivation to thrive for a keep, most big guilds have a broad variety of members.
its not that you can not kill everyone as a keep owner since you have your own "town". it would be more of a keep nerf which is i think the wrong direction to give only PvP heavy guilds a keep. look at the keep spot locations, you wish they are owned by more friendly guilds...

 

[aiky83]

So wardecs it is. Discord is quite vocal about it and as much as i like to talk about things there, this thing is way too much to talk about there so here is my take on in.
I want to remind you while reading this, that if you are in for a relaxed wardec pvp without heavy restrictions and drawbacks this may be not for you at all. So please refrain from just posting "Carebear PvP, this sucks so no."

The most important thing for me personally is meaningful PvP and there should be consequences, like real consequences when you go around murdering people without reason and meaning.
Like the current crim system where you go around killing ppl because your group is bored and then wait for hours and farm some risars or do task to magically turn into the champion
of the city a day later is not ideal in my eyes. If you chose to be a murderer it should be a consequence not taken lightly.

Also keep in mind ANY and ALL numbers and stats ARE NOT worked out at all and have to be modified for this system to work probably.

I'd like to start this by defining some elements i think are kinda cornerstones and key elements in this system.

Assuming a guild that wants to use blue towns on a regular basis

1. Turn individual wardecs into global ones. The guild can chose when to go to war. This does not make NPC guards kill you on sight (unless you are red) but fighting near guards will make them engage you (no town fighting).
2. Once your guild decides they want to go to war, every member gets flagged and they can be killed by EVERYONE without reploss or murdercounts.
3. When war starts the individual murdercounts of the guild members get frozen and the system shifts over to a guild murdercount system, where every kill on a non war flagged player automatically counts as a guild murder count.
4. Individual murdercounts dont deplete while in war and red status of individual members can only be reverse when the war status has ended.
5. Guilds get an index based on their member count, lets say guild a has 10 members (index 1) and guild b has 100 members (index 10), if guild b kills a member of guild a the guild murdercount will rise by 10, while the other way around it raises by 1.
6. The upper limit of that guild murdercount, lets say 200, means guild b can gank guild a with 100vs10 and wipe them 2 times before they reach their guild murdercount limit and drawbacks start to take place.
7. These drawbacks are mainly reploss on a guildwide level. If your guild goes past the limit and someone in your guild kills anyone else who is not at war, every member in your guild loses rep. Also your guild cant gain any rep if you are past the limit and can only do so once the amount of guild murdercounts has fallen below the chosen limit.
8. Reploss and guild murdercounts dont apply when you are in the sphere of influence of your own TC structures, so you can always defend yourself.
9. The upper limit of the guild murder count can be chosen by the guild and depending on that limit the guild has to contribute material for their war effort. Not gold but material. The guild has to meet its demanded materials or their war will end. Itempool and amount of requested materials scales with chosen guild murdercount limit. The materials needed are chosen by RNG once a day from the itempool and the guild has 24 hours to deliver said material to keep the war going.
10. Once the guild decides to end the war or they stop delivering materials, the war status remains active for another 2 hours before it is turned off unless you keep killing people, which refreshes the countdown on each kill. The length of the lingering war buff is extended by a factor determined by the amount of guild murdercounts past the chosen limit. Lets say your limit is said 200 and you have about 300 the buff is extended by 5 minutes per guild murdercount above the limit you have the buff lingering for about 10 hours in total.
11. The unconditional use of siege weapons to fight for territory is tied to the war status. If you use a siege weapons without a war status amd damage something, you lose rep. There should be an option to grant usage of siegeweaponry for each guildmember to prevent abuse.
12. The addition of roaming NPC lictor patrols around blue cities to make reploss meaningful and help defend the local player structures around blue cities.

13. For red guilds this basically changes nothing. They dont have to care about rep, then again they have no risk free business near towns either. They can use siege weapons unrestricted and do as they please.
14. Resource distribution on the map has to be adjusted to give meaning to the TC mechanic and give incentives for players to venture past lictor patrol zones.

So these are just some ideas to think about and improve upon.
The main idea is to basically prevent chivalry TDM gameplay with added mmorpg elements and make this a real medieval sandbox mmorg experience.

Now on to horses.

The current meta is desert horses for everything. I know henrik already mentioned stats will change but still i think this will not help much in terms of leveling it out the usage of the different horses.

Why not break our current roster of horses into 3 categories like the horse armor, light, medium and heavy and only let the matching category wear corresponding tier of armor or below without major drawbacks

The war and heavy duty horses
Jotun and Bull(not yet ingame) - Heavy - Highest stamina and health reserves - Stamina balanced moving gear 2 or below - Slowest speed - Least stamina usage in 4th gear for charging - Can wear heavy armor without penalty - Highest carry capacity - Can draw carriages and siege weapons

The daily use horses
Mongrel and Steppe - Medium - Medium stamina and health reserves - Stamina balanced moving gear 2 or below - Medium Speed - Medium stamina usage 4th gear - Can wear medium armor without penalty - Medium carring capacity - Can draw carriages

The exploration and scout horses
Jungle and Desert - Light - Lowest stamina and health reserves - Stamaina balanced moving gear 3 or below - Highest Speed - Can wear light armor without penalty - Lowest carrying capacity - Can draw nothing

Thas it for now and i hope for a healthy discussion.

Have a nice day.